line 1 - isnt proof - its your pov. If every club thought that a 6 point gap was impossible to make up then we may as well only play 10 games in a season and call it a day. Line 2 - agree that Nouble has done very little Line 3 - and for me the biggest point that nobody can be bothered to answer or in truth probably that nobodies knows - HOW DOES HE PLAY! you say the only argument against him playing is that (I assume) inexperience means we may concede goals but I would say its mainly on how he plays and what his attributes are. Our current front two work well as a pair. I dont actually like Murphy but he has a presence and is the only 'big lump' in our front 6. Without him we are lightweight. Take out McG and we miss out on the only true guile in the whole squad. You could probably move Murphy wide (probably my preferred option) but then we have just signed a true wideman for the first time many seasons to supply the ammunition. Murphy has good workrate but poor ability when it comes to putting the ball in. Its about a team of 11 that can play together not about having 11 individuals. On top of all that NOBODY as far as I can see has said he doesnt deserve time on the bench. The initial debate was about him STARTING GAMES and you appear to have changed from yes he should start (post 2 made by you) to being an inpact sub/ a better option from the bench so basically I think it means your summary has made you look a bit of a fool but thanks for clearing it up!
TB - it is a statistical fact that we are very unlikely to go up. I have never said impossible and it's not POV. I misguidedly went to great lengths to explain why and no-one has countered it with any statistical evidence otherwise. Post 2 - You have latched onto this thing about starting, but when I wrote Post 2 - whether he starts or comes off the bench isn't really the issue. Getting some game time is. Personally, I wouldn't start him but I would rather have started him than leave him out altogether. I accept that none of us have seen him play in the flesh, but I've answered that point as well quite a bit on this thread.
Who said anything about dropping these two (apart from Warky in his overexcited original post)? We have been bringing Nouble on ineffectually every week for ages and we have not earned a single point out of it and the argument goes that Marriot could've won us a game or two in that time.
No mate, I think your inability to bother to read the posts, get your head around simple concepts and call people's valid posts manure has done that very nicely for you
Hamps, We will agree to disagree on the first point. I dont think the play offs are likely and were certainly not in my thoughts at the start of the season. I just find it very negative to say 6 points in a major ask with so much of the season left. I agree, as you posted in a early round of comments that once its gets into double figures then it becomes difficult Part 2. The majority of this thread is about whether he should start or not - that is the whole point and the initial subject matter. Off course I have latched onto it. Its seems that 99% of people on this thread are in favour of him getting on bench time but the major differences are whether we chuck him straight into the starting line up or not. If your now saying that the starting isnt the issue its just some kind of game time then we have basically wasted 6 pages on ALL HAVING THE SAME BLOODY POINT OF VIEW.
I did bother to read posts HENCE why I know you started of with saying he should start and have now changed to not starting Maybe you should try to be consistant on your view point and it would be a lot easier for everyone to understand
I posted that as YOU on page 1 comment 2 said you wanted him to START. We cant START with 12 players so suprisingly someone has to drop out. I asked who. IF I HAD KNOWN THAT WHAT YOU POSTED WAS NOT WHAT YOU ACTUALLY MEANT THEN I WOULDNT HAVE WASTED MY BLOODY TIME OF THIS THREAD! Hardly rocket science is it.
You obviously don't bother reading things or you would not respond to "The players he was competing with to come off the bench did not perform or look like performing." with all this "you say the only argument against him playing is that (I assume) inexperience means we may concede goals but I would say its mainly on how he plays and what his attributes are. Our current front two work well as a pair. I dont actually like Murphy but he has a presence and is the only 'big lump' in our front 6. Without him we are lightweight. Take out McG and we miss out on the only true guile in the whole squad. You could probably move Murphy wide (probably my preferred option) but then we have just signed a true wideman for the first time many seasons to supply the ammunition. Murphy has good workrate but poor ability when it comes to putting the ball in. Its about a team of 11 that can play together not about having 11 individuals. "
It's you who got carried away with the starting thing. Not my fault for that TB. #15 "There is no debate to be had. He should have been coming off the bench weeks ago."
I'm not saying you have to go reading every post, of course not, but if you're going to use the word manure you probably should get the context first
That's all I've said all along. I said we need to turn it around now to have a chance. Maybe with the Ireland thing out of the way and with Hunt in it can make a difference. It is unlikely now but if it gets to 10-12 points (might be that after the next two tough games) then we can pretty much forget all about it.
Hamps, The thing that has got me annoyed about this thread is it appears we all basically feel the same way. I apologise if posting 'sensationalist garbage' put the thread on the wrong track and feel there is no good to come with the bickering. Im going off this thread now and hope we can all start afresh on new topics.
If you quit the patronising tone and stopped putting your opinion accross as fact others may not act in such a hostile way, just sayin!!!
Agree and it was pretty stupid decision but I think we could've done worse than keep hold of a couple of others. Despite spending millions I'm sure we would've done just as well if we'd kept some of our youngsters like Garvan, Trotter, Eastman etc and looks like Carson has found form aswell. Think the problem is the club has been so short term the past few seasons that the youngsters haven't had a chance or got disenchanted by the constant changes. I mean when Royle was here we played our youngsters Richards, Westlake and Barron, none of whom were the most talented but all served us well. This Marriott fella seems to be doing okay and I'd like to see him given a bit more game time but this in the main I think is because our other strikers have been poor/average
The problem is ptc that the probability of us getting into the playoffs is not something I conjured up out of thin air it is bloody fact. If you can't get your head around it I don't have a problem, what I have a problem with is the reaction to it. If you don't understand just say you don't understand, don't accuse me of talking ****e as a result. By way of illustration of just how pathetic it is you inadvertently posted a couple of league tables that demonstrated perfectly what I was saying. As if that wasn't enough you're still at it.
I'm not overreacting but equally there's no need to apologise, I gave as good as I got in this instance
Hampy how about going for that break you spoke about a while ago, I think you need it as you didn't take it before.... I've generally found you to be fairly reasonable kind of guy even if there is a difference of opinion but the past month or so you've been so patronising and actually disrespectful to people and seem to be on one where you think the worlds against you and you must be proven right. I'd say take a chill pill before someone crosses the line as you're going the right way about it!!! Infact I'm going to take a leaf out of weightys book and not say anything to you for a while because quite frankly you're getting on my nerves!!!
